«
There is a fundamental problem with the BBC and all public broadcasting enterprises. They are magnets for anti- traditionalist, leftist staffers who fondle their ideals over the air, knowing they are in a business far removed from the disgusting commercialism of their competitors. Their revenue is carved directly out of the public’s hide.
»

The core thesis of this article is that public funding shouldn’t support
Left wing opinions. This old saw of an argument is frequently used against
the PBS in the US and against funding public art. It’s amazing how intolerant
some people are of dissent. Recall that there have been many nations who
carefully reviewed and approved each piece of public art to ensure none of
it offended.

Nazi Germany was one such country, as was the Soviet Union.

It’s funny how the media clings to the idea of objectivity when no one can
agree on what objective reporting is. As Jon Steward recently pointed out in
his interview with Bill Moyers, editors make subjective decisions about the
order of new stories. Those that are deemed “important” are presented first.
Yet even a casual review of any news outlet will should that importance is
frequently defined as that outlet’s self-interest rather than an obligation
to some “public trust.” This article here is clearly labelled an editorial
written by a “conservative” who task the BBC to task for criticising Blair
during the 2003 Iraq war. It’s wonderful to read this article as it portrays
opposition to an administration’s policy as a “menace” and a “propaganda outlet
for peaceniks”. It’s jolting to see Cold War rhetoric applied to any news
paper let alone the BBC.

This is a funny time to be alive on Earth. With many countries of the West
becoming uncomfortable Right wing, one has to wonder where we are heading a
such a fast pace? Why is it so wrong to question is the destination is worth
the trip?